BBV: Why haven't grassroots dems filed a class action suit?

[Jolene]

I'll start off by saying I'm not lawyer, but I am a dem who is sick and tired of watching as leadership fails me on the most fundamental of things. I'm speaking, of course, about what I feel is the right of the citizenry to cast a ballot and feel certain that the vote cast has been counted.

Why can't grassroots dems file a class action suit demanding that the republican-owned software which runs our machines has independent oversight?

[E_Zapata]

1. One thing we could do:

is start organizing right now for every single person who wants their vote hand counted to prepare a paper ballot that is identical to what they vote on the machines and get a unbiased, independent accounting firm to count them.

To hell with the republicans who don't turn one in.

If we could show the real numbers of the democratic voters - and even some republican voters who are concerned - and compare to the computer results, our case would be proven.

Think about it: every single precinct in the country hand counted and compared. What can they say if our hand counts reveal 65% for a candidate but the computer only gives the candidate 45%?

Better than an exit poll.

Expensive - would take massive organization - a good deal of money But do-able.

[gristy]

6. The logic of this escapes me

It doesn't seem that it "proves" anything. Not to mention the difficulty of getting any more than a handful of voters to do this.

[Eloriel]

2. I'm ready

Care to find us a lawyer?

Actually, there ought to be about a dozen or two "reasons" to file law suits (not being a lawyer myself that comment is worth exactly what you paid for it).

So, let's go.

Several of us have spent many hours trying to find a lawyer.

Eloriel

[Jolene]

3. I think conducting a recount of our own is also a good idea...

but I simply cannot fathom why grassroots dems have not sued the pants off elections machines software vendors.

As for finding a lawyer, I would have no idea where to start. A non-profit agency with legal aid at its disposal could do it. Since I hear so much about the dayumed liberal lawyers and how they're a scourge on this nation, I don't understand why this should be so difficult.

[JPace]

4. I don't want to get flamed here....

but I wonder if Ralph Nader might be interested
in leading such an effort.

Now after saying it I'm running away....

those who suggest and run away,
live to suggest another day!

[Patriot_Spear]

19. You need to contact Erin Brockovich...

I bet she could point you in the right direction- and I think she's a Dem too.

[punpirate]

5. Well, I'm not a lawyer, either...

... but I hang out with a few once in while, and the problem with a class-action suit is that one has show that harm has been done, either by non-compliance with the law, or demonstrate that an inequity inherent in the law has produced the harm shown. Can you do that?

The manufacturers (and the states which have bought such equipment) claim that the equipment meets the certification requirements of state and Federal law (although some state election officials may be trying blur the line between the two these days). State election officials maintain that their elections have been held in accordance with law. And while we might argue strenuously about the _current_ oversight having flaws with regard to transparency, one can't argue that election officials are not meeting current law by having national ITAs and their own election officials test the machines, which is essentially what they are doing, however sloppy that process may be. That argument would not work in court--the manufacturers would say that they do get national certifications from the ITAs. The state election officials say they obtain those certifications and keep them current and test for compliance with law at the state level. The details in that process are what have been shown to be suspect.

It's sometimes possible to obtain an injunction, if one can show that by letting an election proceed (or perhaps a purchase of particular machines proceed), harm will immediately result. But, at that point, one has to supply some pretty sound legal and technical evidence in some specificity.

Specificity is driving us all nuts. We see the _potential_ for harm, but the election officials and manufacturers are pooh-poohing that. It's been impossible, thus far, to obtain accurate records from the states regarding which software versions were certified in accordance with state and Federal law, as compared with which versions actually used in elections.

In the case of, say, Georgia, they say, of course they're the same, but the election officials, to my knowledge, have yet to be willing to produce a machine as it was configured for the 2002 election and certification papers to match the software used. From what some have been able to determine, the certifications asserted for the software used in 2002 are out-of-date, compared to what was actually used. Getting the documentation in that matter has been very frustrating for some people here, and unsuccessful, so far. Might the discovery process in a court case finally produce those documents? Yes, possibly. But, the charges in the case would have to be pretty good for the case to go on to that point.

Others are certain to have different opinions on this, and certainly a lot more knowledge on the subject, but my best guess is that a suit demanding redress for injury would require some very powerful evidence of vote-tampering, right from the get-go.

Injunctions to stop the process and seek modification of it would be almost as difficult--judges are not, by nature, scientifically aware people, so there's a tremendous amount of education required, just to be heard properly. Saying that someone _could_ tamper with an election probably would not be enough (that's possible with any method of voting). Saying that some party or individual _intends_ to tamper with an election would require legally admissible evidence of a specificity not now available.

I know, it stinks--most of us know that the potential for abuse with the proposed generation of machines, absent a voter-verified paper trail, is dangerous as hell.

The best hope now is to work on legislators to modify existing law to take care of some of these very large loopholes and flaws in the process. If and when someone comes up with legally admissible evidence of vote-tampering and/or violation of election law, that should be taken to the appropriate prosecutor. If they won't prosecute, and the evidence is good, that would be the time for a citizens' suit.

Cheers.

[Jolene]

7. Well, after waiting for three long years

for our legislators to do something about this, I've pretty much given up.

When citizens of states outside Florida cannot file grievances against software vendors for harm resulting from the software used in Florida, which threw the entire election into a tailspin (It seems I even remember some eluding to 'Constitutional crisis.') There's something wrong with our legal system.

Because we can't file grievances and expect to be heard, and because the electoral college plays the role it does, it makes it possible for one state with widespread voter disenfranchisement to decide our national elections. If that's not harm, I don't know what is. If that doesn't violate my equal protection, I don't know what does. But then, I'm not a lawyer.

Like I said, I've given up on our leadership. I haven't heard one single democratic candidate take up the issue of free and fair elections and a need to reform the system so that citizens feel certain that going to the polling place is worth the effort.

What a banana republic this is. Why bother?

[JPace]

8. "Why bother?"

You haven't given up or you would not
be hanging out around here. You care
and that makes you angry....but you
are needed, and someday we will all
make a difference. Keep the faith!

[Jolene]

12. Oh, I care alright

But not enough to keep a date with a rapist, especially when that rapist is nourished with the complicity of my own party leaders.

I'll work for the party, but I will not get screwed again. If something isn't done to assure democrats that going to the polls is worth the effort, I'm not going.

[Cocoa]

14. voters can sue too

you don't have to be an elected official to bring a voting rights suit to court. The NAACP brought a class action suit in Florida, not sure how it ended up, but it got heard.

[hang a left]

41. they settled out of court

they are on the grease.

[Cocoa]

45. what does "on the grease" mean?

not suggesting the NAACP was bribed to drop it are you?

[Pobeka]

16. Maybe there's another kind of harm

The harm done to people who no longer can trust their government, because they are denied the basic right to have a clear understanding of how their vote is counted.

Is this the kind of harm that could make a suit viable? I dunno. Just a thought. Can a relationship between this lack of trust and health problems generated from the stress be a hard enough link for harm?

I really need to go to bed.

Cheers to you punpirate :hi:

[punpirate]

39. To us, it's a tangible harm...

... but is it definable legally? Disenfranchisement of the public is a serious matter, but can one put a value on it in legal terms? Probably not.

As for the problems in Florida, I'm beginning to think they've been taking lessons from Louisiana.... Nah, that's not fair--there's a Bush involved. *smile*

Cheers.

[Gin]

18. If we can wage a pre-emptive war....to stop injustice....why not

a pre-emptive lawsuit to stop injustice?

[Occulus]

20. ELORIEL

Maybe something more could be done if Diebold et al sued the activists. As Jim says, discovery would be a blast.

[DEMActivist]

21. As Jim says....

Bring it on.

Yes, discovery would be fun.

[Clete]

9. You could start by feeding the information on BBV

to your local media. Some DU'ers already have, and some smaller local newspapers have published cautious stories about the suspicions and evidence for possible tampering. Also, the Yahoo news story published today indicates it is starting to get momentum. It's the only way for the story to start getting huge is for everyone to get their hometown newspaper involved in it. Once the story gets enough attention, the main media can't ignore it.

Then, once everyone starts to question if the elections could be compromised, you might find lawyers coming to you for a legal action. Also, would the ACLU be interested in this? They might. Try them.

[BevHarris]

27. Clete -- it was your email that triggered the SLO Tribune article

The reporter asked me "who is sending me these emails?"

She did an excellent article, by the way.

[Clete]

36. I didn't know that.

:-)I thought they would think I was a fringe conspiracy theory nut but I sent it anyway, just in case. You see the Tribune is a pretty conservative local newspaper. See, it does work. You guys get to work and start sending this information to everyone. It will be something that can't be ignored.

[shance]

10. Great suggestion Jolene. Any attorneys here?

Republicans are reknowned for churning out lawsuits at every turn. Just look at Bill Clinton.

Why are 'we' not looking at this option?

[bearfan454]

23. Darn good idea !

[shance]

11. Could Dems provide evidence of harm inflicted?

n/t

[Jolene]

13. Is George W. Bush 'harm?'

Oh, forget it. This is getting me nowhere. I'm beginning to understand why people stared blankly at me in 2000, as I was pounding the pavement to GOTV.

They get it.

[Eloriel]

24. "Harm" in a legal sense

(the best I, as a non-lawyer, can describe it this morning) is, basically, "how much money did it cost you?" That's tort law. The court needs to know exactly how it is that you, pesonally, were harmed, so it can figure how much $$$ damages should be.

For whatever reason, lawyers don't seem to think having an election (probably or possibly) thrown meets the "harm" if we're not the candidate. And none of the candidates seem interested in pursuing this. Also, there is a statute of limitations on overturning elections, and we're far past that. Nor is the election official not doing his/her job right actionable.

Finally, Georgia did the amazing thing of updating their software in May, which effectively destroyed a good bit of "evidence."

Eloriel

[PATRICK]

31. Harm, expectation of fairness

When we donate a few dollars in the expectation of a fair contest and find out the "roulette wheel" is rigged don't we have a few angles of recourse open? The circular one of saying that our elected officials decide these matters and all we have to do is vote them out becomes ludicrous. Shouldn't all the donors sue for their money back and so stimulate the defrauded candidate to join in?

No, the real reason for this reluctance I am willing to bet is the political protection that turf has enjoyed from any prosecution or investigation except the most stupid and outrageous or as part of an inside the system counter coup. Although they had to shoot Huey Long to get rid of him. I bet if you check out most cases, and the most publicized, it was some boob crossing someone in his own party or falling all over himself and even then the likelihood of conviction and punishment seemed to shrink daily. or it was the GOP(and their DOJ tool) nitpicking fraud accusations of little merit or consequence to intimidate the Dems from even seeing the massive fraud being done to them. That worked splendidly in 2002.

[Vadem]

34. How much harm? How about a $500 billion deficit brought to

us by the fradulent GWB administration and the counting ain't over yet?

I'm in for the class action suit!

We're opening Paypal accounts for various investigations, hell, let's open one for a class action suit brought by the voters against ALL the States that have bought these damable machines and who refuse to hear us on their corruptibility of our votes!

You don't think that would hit the press, big time, and open everyone's eyes???

[janekat]

37. I'm a Florida voter who didn't have my vote counted....

...oh that's right - it's been tried before. Maybe there's a new angle.

[E_Zapata]

15. Better idea: get citizens in each state to sue their SOS!

Get oodles of residents in each state to sue their secretary of state and their HAVA committees and whoever else would be responsible for free elections in that state. Then get a class action certified in each state.

Who cares what the machines can and can't do. The parties responsible to us, the people, are our election officials. We go to them to demand standards that will ensure free elections. Demand specific performance as to the standards that must be met for elections in each individual state.

There is no law that says a state can't have more stringent standards than a federal law (HAVA).

[bearfan454]

22. The Tx SOS has ignored 5 emails I sent. I wrote a letter to the

Austin American Statesman and they haven't decided if they are going to publish it or not yet. I am going to keep emailing the SOS of Tx about this issue until I get some type of response.

[Cocoa]

17. kick

:kick:

[NoKingGeorge]

25. Wite in ballot- absentee ballots

I am planning on sending in an absentee ballot just so I have a copy. If many sent in absontee ballots, and had a certified (notary) copy this would draw somer attention to the issue. Plus the criminals would know that their is 'evidence' of their crime.

[PATRICK]

30. Why buy boycotted machines?

How much grassroots resistance in your area needs to be mobilized to make the purchase of unauditable touchscreen voting machines useless and a waste of money?

Rather than go to these infomercial rvevival tent presentations by Diebold shills and try to fight through the hypnotic BS, lay down the ultimatum.

No way can they prove they the ordinary citizen can transparently oversee a cyberspace record of votes. Put the brakes on the spin.
The only place to start with electronic aids is to have a paper ballot made at the same time as a SIMPLE single or double key ballot machine records and tabulates the votes. Simply a timesaver and a check on all those "paper problems" they supposedly want to deliver us from. Cheap, fast, no glitches. I could undercut Diebold's bid by millions though of course their brilliant whistle and drum training of poll workers might come in useful.

I mean us guys who USED to be able to fix our own cars now COMPLETELY trust the mechanics we were avoiding like the plague because they have that wondrous computer analysis for all the chips and gizmos mysteriously glitching. Right. And complexity is so much fun as ALL people who grow adept at computer engineering find when they inadvertently crash their hardrive and need a crystal ball to find out why. And some day we'll be voting on the net- whether we want to or not- are ALIVE or not. Maybe Mickey Mouse will get a write in victory.
And just why is it we didn't all get to vote by telephone decades ago?

And didn't we hear the Clintons are financing an electronic balloting machine? Rev. Moon? The Bin Ladens? oh wait, that was Sen. Hagel, etc.

Boycott the machines until the handwringing LWV and ACLU have an indignant breakdown.

Also, it seems we might have been suckered for many years before the digital age in buying ludicrous machinery that separated the voter from his actual mark ofn the ballot, a ballot separated from the voter by the box, another price paid by the squeamish to protect their privacy. each time we make things easier for the voter, the actual vote moves farther and farther down the rabbit hole. The non-voters, already the bane of democracy are fashioning digital slave collars around our necks and they are no more good citizens for all the effort than they ever have been. The seduction for Democrats who KNOW they are the only ones really representing the vast majority to simply rope in numbers is another gentle push down the rabbit hole. The terrible twin of this idealism gone awry is the slacker(or exploiter) who does not monitor whatever system that exists since the IMPROVED system not only looks good, but takes it out of sight in daunting fashion.

Elections geared for stupidity. And they think the people are stupid enough not to see the sleight of hand- because after all it IS really invisible this time?

This is the same thing about keeping quiet to not dispel the MYTH of democracy, a sentiment of magical government perpetuated by decadent idealism even in our own rarefied upper strata of party professionals.
"Don't knock the machines, or we'll have a Florida mess!" people won't vote. Circular, evasive, win-win, self-contradicting arguments everywhere. Cut the circle. Have no patience when it comes time to mobilize people against the chance of being robbed of their vote.

[BevHarris]

26. The "independent oversight" should be US -- not some committee

A class action suit is a great idea, but it should focus on pulling the plug on the machines due to a complete breakdown in the certification procedure.

There is no reason to have some independent" group overseeing things -- ostensibly, that's what they'll say we have now, with The Election Center.

The voting system must be simple enough that we, the people can oversee them. The idea that we must trust some group to decide for us is a poor one.

I am getting increasingly frustrated with county election officials who have no expertise whatsoever going public with uninformed and often erroneous information about these systems. A good example is San Luis Obispo.

Julie Rodewald just did an interview on the Guy Rathbun show, and in it she states that she fully trusts the machines. I spoke with Rodewald at some length, and she was so unfamiliar with remote access issues that she could not even answer whether she has a modem set up in her own office. She had to call in the IT guy. Let me explain just how dangerous this is:

In fact, she has a digiboard with, I believe, 24 modems coming into it which route incoming vote data from the polling places. (have to check my notes, I think the number is 24).

She made statements that the voting machines at the polling places have their modems turned off; actually, I got some answers on this from techs, and they were not comforting. They indicated that the internal modems on the optical scan machines can dial out with or without a physical phone line, and are set to dial out automatically.

Here's the point: We cannot have a system where even our own elected officials can't understand the setup, much less stay informed on the risks. Ms. Rodewald is not a tech person, and there is no reason to expect her to understand the internal modem settings on an optical scan. The problem is -- that information is critical to the security of the votes she is supervising.

Let's not get into a technical back-and-forth about modems settings and so forth here. My point is this: The current system is being run by people who don't have the expertise to understand it. I do not favor electing only computer scientists to run our voting system. Instead, we need a voting system that does not require computer science expertise to understand it.

Having an "oversight" board does nothing to solve our problem, which is that we now have an overly complex system that citizens and even elected officials can't understand, which isn't even audited.

First, lets solve the auditability problem. Adding another level of (corruptible and crony-prone) bureacracy will just cost more and give us more headaches.

Bev Harris

[sangh0]

28. Wasn't there already a class-action suit filed?

By the Civil Rights Commission? Didn't they negotiate a settlement? If so, I think a class-action lawsuit would be thrown out on the grounds that the issue has already been resolved by the settlement.

[cap]

33. the basic and key decisions must be made by the people...

the technicians can only implement the will of the people.

[punpirate]

40. Wait a minute....

"...actually, I got some answers on this from techs, and they were not comforting. They indicated that the internal modems on the optical scan machines can dial out with or without a physical phone line, and are set to dial out automatically."

Alright, by what magic does this occur? If you disconnect the phone line on your home modem, and the modem tries to dial out, what happens? You _cannot_ get a connection. Period. End of story.

If this is true, then SLO has wireless adapters.

Cheers.

[shance]

43. Wireless? That sounds interesting.....

What could that ultimately mean?

[punpirate]

44. It means...

... yet another not very secure means of transmission. It means yet another means of access to tamper with results. It means, perhaps, that in 2002 or prior, SLO had wireless installed, perhaps without having that system re-certified.

The only other thing it can mean is that SLO technicians don't know their butts from a basketball. Modems work with phone lines--that is what they are made to do--the name indicates phone lines--MOdulate-DEModulate. They don't work without them. If the OS machines can communicate without phone lines or without network wiring, by definition, they are wireless.

On edit, all true unless one of their technicians is Harry Potter....

Cheers.

[Eloriel]

42. EXCELLENT post -- and not only that,

I think it's one that most citizens would get. Easily.

Eloriel

[cap]

29. yes, this can be done...

the software does not meet the law. There has been harm done especially to minorities who have not had their vote counted.

It needs a point by point analysis of the law showing which parts of the software do not live up to this analysis. Every place the law says "shall" is a mandatory requirement for the software.

[Mairead]

32. National Lawyers Guild

http://www.nlg.org

The National Lawyers Guild is an association dedicated to the need for basic change in the structure of our political and economic system. The Guild unites lawyers, law students, and legal workers as an effective political and social force in the service of the people. Our aims:

to eliminate racism;
to safeguard and strengthen the rights of workers, women, farmers and minority groups, upon whom the welfare of the entire nation depends;
to maintain and protect our civil rights and liberties in the face of persistent attacks upon them;
to use the law as an instrument for the protection of the people, rather than for their repression.

[janekat]

35. This is actually the best way to bring a company to their knees

They can't afford to fight them so they have to settle. It costs them BIG bucks.

We just can't let right-wingers catch on to the idea. They'd be suing everybody.

[janekat]

38. Here's the perfect law firm for us

a California law firm who specializes in civil rights law suits. I'm sure they'd love the publicity they'd get...

http://www.schneiderwallace.com/